04.30.10

Nebraska’s new abortion restriction law may signal a paradigm shift in the abortion debate.

The current standard for whether the state can interfere with a woman’s right to kill her baby derives from Roe v. Wade: viability. If the unborn baby can survive outside the womb, the state has a compelling interest to protect that life and thus restrict abortion. During the second trimester, the state may regulate abortion “in ways that are reasonably related to maternal health.” During the third trimester, the state may restrict or ban abortion “except where necessary, in appropriate medical judgment, for the preservation of the life or health of the mother.” Babies born at 28 weeks, the beginning of the third trimester, have a 90 percent survival rate.

Last week, Nebraska’s non-partisan legislature passed a measure 40-9 that alters the standard in the state. Signed by Governor Dave Heineman, the law bans most abortions 20 weeks after conception (with the usual exception for life or health of the mother), and it’s based on the notion that unborn babies can feel pain at that stage. The governor signed a related bill that requires abortion providers to screen women seeking abortions for mental and other risk factors and evaluate whether they were pressured into the decision.

A frequently cited 2005 Journal of the American Medical Association article suggested the earliest an unborn baby can feel pain is 28 weeks. National Right to Life Director of State Legislation Mary Spaulding Balch disagrees. “By 20 weeks after fertilization, unborn children have pain receptors throughout their body, and nerves link these to the brain,” she said. “These unborn children recoil from painful stimulation, which also dramatically increases their release of stress hormones. Doctors performing fetal surgery at and after 20 weeks now routinely use fetal anesthesia.”

This means babies torn apart during a second-trimester dilation and extraction may feel their dismemberment. Now imagine a so-called partial birth abortion, in which a third-trimester baby is delivered down the birth canal, with his head left inside. The “doctor” punctures the base of his skull with a pair of scissors and opens the scissors to enlarge the hole.

Perhaps the law will do what other efforts could not. In 1984, the formerly pro-abortion Dr. Bernard Nathanson sounded the alarm on fetal pain. He created a video called “Silent Scream,” which showed the killing of a 12-week-old unborn baby. The baby appears to scream in pain as he’s torn apart in the womb. Naturally, abortion advocates called the film misleading. According to TIME, “experts” said a 12-week-old baby can’t move “purposefully” as depicted in the film, and he can’t perceive danger.

Abby Johnson would disagree. A former Planned Parenthood executive director, Johnson left her employer after watching an abortion on ultrasound. She told the Christian Broadcasting Network that she watched the 13-week-old unborn baby “trying to get away from the probe that the doctor was using…I just wanted to make it stop…I could see it twisting and just saw it crumble…I will never do this again.” A baby one week older than the “Silent Scream” baby apparently moved purposefully and perceived danger.

Here is a preview of the next socialist agenda item to be forced down our throats.

What a difference 24 hours makes.

Yesterday President Obama appeared to close the door on addressing immigration reform this year, saying, “We’ve gone through a very tough year, and I’ve been working Congress pretty hard. I know there may not be an appetite to dive into another controversial issue.”

But today, Democrat leaders in Washington announced a new effort just days after Arizona Gov. Jan Brewer signed a bill that enables her state to enforce illegal immigration.

The reaction to the Arizona law has ranged from condemnation by Obama to the sometimes violent protests by illegals who don’t want to face police questioning about their status and the Mexican government’s new warning about travel by Mexicans in Arizona.

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid announced the new Democrat effort, noting its requirement that illegal aliens learn English and pay taxes.

“I say to my Republican colleagues, work with us to fix this broken system, and secure our borders,” Reid said.

But Rep. John Boehner, the House minority leader, said Republican support wasn’t likely after the president’s massive health-care reform plan was “shoved down our throats.”

Nevertheless, some opponents of illegal immigration worried that the federal plan was being assembled as a deliberate attack on Arizona’s new efforts to protect its citizens.

Obama’s statement today seemed to lend credence to their concerns.

“It is the federal government’s responsibility to enforce the law and secure our borders, as well as to set clear rules and priorities for future immigration,” Obama’s prepared statement released by the White House said.

“The continued failure of the federal government to fix the broken immigration system will leave the door open to a patchwork of actions at the state and local level that are inconsistent and as we have seen recently, often misguided,” he said.

Obama said it is “unacceptable to have 11 million people in the United States who are living here illegally and outside the system.”

Critics such as Federation for American Immigration Reform, or FAIR, agree, but they argue that simply enforcing the nation’s existing immigration laws would make a great deal of difference.

The group, which obtained an advance copy of the legislation outline, said Americans need to call their representatives in Washington.

“Tell them you want enforcement, not amnesty,” FAIR said.

“The [new] proposal offers all kinds of promises regarding the future enforcement of our immigration laws. But we know through years of experience and hard lessons that the federal government has broken virtually every enforcement promise it has made to the American people. Now, Senators Reid, Schumer and Menendez go so far as to say: ‘there will be zero tolerance for illegal entry and reentry into the U.S.’ Who can believe this?” the organization said.

The group warned that the new plan would pre-empt state and locals laws encouraging immigration enforcement and would grant amnesty.

Spokesman Dustin Carnevale told WND the proposal appears to be a preventive maneuver – to halt other states from taking action similar to Arizona’s. He noted that Brewer received a 16-point bump in her popularity within her state immediately after she signed the bill.

FAIR President Dan Stein earlier congratulated the governor.

“FAIR applauds Gov. Jan Brewer, Sen. Russell Pearce and other Arizona leaders for acting decisively to protect Arizonans as they cope with a crisis brought on by mass illegal immigration. Once again, Arizona is showing the rest of the nation that in the face of federal indifference to border security, state and local governments have the ability to protect their citizens and public resources.”

William Gheen, president of Americans for Legal Immigration PAC, told WND he believes the Democrats will try to “ram” the issue through with or without any GOP support – or at least lead Hispanic populations to believe they will.

“What they’re doing may be a tactic to decrease the amount of time illegals understand they won’t be getting what they want,” he said.

He said the situation puts Democrats in a dangerous position politically.

“We’re talking about 60-85 percent of the public in opposition. This is going to be a strictly partisan issue in the elections with the GOP not supporting and Dems supporting amnesty,” he said.

“That is going to increase their political casualties. The public is fed up with illegal immigration. They know the immigration system isn’t broken. There is no reason Congress should even be considering legislation until the constitutional structure, having the president enforce the law, is in place,” he said.

Already, a Texas lawmaker has announced plans to seek legislation similar to Arizona’s.

“We’d like for Congress to pass a special bill demanding that the census data be used,” Gheen told WND at the time. “The alarm that needs to be raised is that every illegal alien that fills out the census is stealing taxpayer resources and political representation.”

Obama and the liberal Left are never going to get it through their soggy little skulls that the Right does not act like them. Sure, there are isolated idiots who will get out of line, but as a whole, the Tea Party attendees do not act badly and are only there to exercise their First Amendment rights.
Team Obama and company should feel like complete fools, but my guess is that they are too busy being elitist to actually bother getting a handle on reality.

When hundreds of tea-party protesters – including many elderly women – gathered outside a civic center where President Obama was giving a public speech Wednesday, they were surprised to be greeted by police dispatched in full riot gear.

Obama spoke in Quincy, Ill., at the Oakley Lindsay Civic Center. The event was open to the public, and about 2,000 tickets were distributed on a first-come, first-serve basis.

About 200 protesters peacefully rallied outside the civic center, carrying signs that read “Give Us Liberty Not Debt” and yellow “Don’t Tread On Me” flags, the Quincy Herald-Whig reported. Protesters waved U.S. flags and shouted “Remember in November” and “You work for us.”

‘Look at these extremist maniacs!’

After Obama’s motorcade arrived, a Secret Service agent instructed protesters to move across the street. The crowd began singing “God Bless, America” and the National Anthem. Quincy Deputy Police Chief Ron Dreyer ordered police in full riot gear to march up the street and stand between the tea partiers and the civic center.

Snipers were also spotted on the rooftop of the building.

The tea partiers complied when they were told to move across the street, behind a sidewalk and into a parking lot. The riot police did not come into contact with the crowd, and the tea partiers sang patriotic songs while obeying the orders.

“Thanks for protecting our president,” one tea partier can be heard saying on a video of the event. “He’s the anointed One, the Messiah.”

Another man said, “Illegals are rioting, and we’re as peaceful as you can believe.”

NBC affiliate WGEM described the crowd as “rowdy,” though they could be heard singing “God Bless America” in the background during the report.

Inside, Obama told the crowd, “[W]hen I travel now, it kind of causes a ruckus.”

Michelle Malkin’s blog responded to the incident with the headline “Riot police called in to protect Obama from out-of-control tea party.”

There are three seemingly unrelated reports, but I want to throw this out there for the record. I pray that my “connecting the dots” turns out to be horribly misdirected, but I fear that it is not.

The first report is that oil from the Deepwater Horizon, BP drilling platform, is starting to come ashore along the Louisiana coast. According to Fox News:

Oil from a massive spill in the Gulf of Mexico was starting to ooze ashore, threatening migrating birds, nesting pelicans and even river otters and mink along Louisiana’s fragile islands and barrier marshes.

Crews in boats were patrolling coastal marshes early Friday looking for areas where the oil has flowed in, the Coast Guard said.

The leak from a blown-out well a mile underwater is five times bigger than first believed. Faint fingers of oily sheen were reaching the Mississippi River delta late Thursday, lapping the Louisiana shoreline in long, thin lines. Thicker oil was about five miles offshore. Officials have said they would do everything to keep the Mississippi River open to traffic.

The oil slick could become the nation’s worst environmental disaster in decades, threatening to eclipse even the Exxon Valdez in scope. It imperils hundreds of species of fish, birds and other wildlife along the Gulf Coast, one of the world’s richest seafood grounds, teeming with shrimp, oysters and other marine life.

But further to the loss of animal life, which in itself is horrible, the Houston Chronicle reported yesterday:

The marshy areas along the Louisiana coast serve as nature’s speed bumps, slowing storms as they make landfall. Oil would further damage vegetation in the already vanishing wetlands. Without enough plants and grasses, the marshes could turn into open water unable to reduce a storm’s wallop.

OK, I’ll concede that the plants will grown back over time. But we have this report from Hurricane Center meteorologists:

Hurricane Center meteorologists, led by Chief Long-Range Meteorologist and Hurricane Forecaster Joe Bastardi, are calling for a much more active 2010 season with above-normal threats on the U.S. coastline.

“This year has the chance to be an extreme season,” said Bastardi. “It is certainly much more like 2008 than 2009 as far as the overall threat to the United States’ East and Gulf coasts.”

Bastardi is forecasting seven landfalls. Five will be hurricanes, and two or three of the hurricanes will be major landfalls for the U.S.

He is calling for 16 to 18 tropical storms in total, 15 of which would be in the western Atlantic or Gulf of Mexico, and therefore a threat to land.

So here is how this scenario may play out.

The oil slick moved faster than authorities anticipated and will create a major disaster for the Gulf Coast shoreline, damaging or destroying storm “buffer” areas.

The hurricane season starts in about a month and is expected to be very active with several Gulf hurricanes coming ashore.

Last Wednesday (April 28), Israel Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu “agreed to quietly halt all Jewish construction in eastern Jerusalem as a “confidence-building gesture” toward the Palestinian Authority as demanded by the Obama administration.”

“Steve”, many of you will say, “you’re crazy!!”
I hope so, for the sake of many good people. I pray that my possible scenario is total fiction and will not happen at all. Remember, I live on the Gulf Coast; this could all be happening in my back yard. This will affect my family and I.
God is going to respond to the massive abuse our government has levied against Israel. The “apple of God’s eyes”; Israel, will not be abused without response.
We have already seen weather that is totally out of line with the season and our past experience.
I wonder if we are going to “connect the dots” before it is too late?

Obama (and the U.S. by extension) is preparing to slap Israel (and God by extension) yet again. Hang on for the ride folks; it’s going to get bumpy!!

In an attempt to launch indirect proximity talks between Israel and the Palestinians, the US has given private assurances that it would consider not using its veto power against UN Security Council condemnations of any significant new settlement activity, the Guardian reported.

A Palestinian source quoted by the UK paper said David Hale, a deputy of US Middle East envoy George Mitchell, told Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas last week that if there was “significantly provocative settlement activity,” including in east Jerusalem, Washington may consider allowing UNSC resolutions censuring Israel to pass. According to the paper, the source said “it was understood that meant the US would abstain from voting on a resolution rather than use its veto.”

However, chief Palestinian negotiator Saeb Erekat denied assurances were given. “It’s not true,” he said, according to the Guardian. “We are still talking to the Americans.”

Meanwhile, in an interview with the Chinese Xinhua news agency on Wednesday, Abbas claimed the US had vowed to stop “any provocative activities” by Israel in a bid to resume Middle East peace talks.

Abbas said when “the credibility of the US pledges are demonstrated,” the negotiations “would restart immediately.”

The PA president criticized Washington for “not exerting enough effort to press Israel to achieve peace,” but reiterated his opposition to a unilateral declaration of statehood.

“We want our state to be declared under an international agreement,” he said. “If this doesn’t happen, the Arabs will go to the UN Security Council to get the recognition of the Palestinian statehood,” the PA president told Xinhua.

04.29.10

Of all the idiotic things the U.N. has done, this one crumples up common sense and discards it in the nearest trash bin.

NEW YORK — Without fanfare, the United Nations this week elected Iran to its Commission on the Status of Women, handing a four-year seat on the influential human rights body to a theocratic state in which stoning is enshrined in law and lashings are required for women judged “immodest.”

Just days after Iran abandoned a high-profile bid for a seat on the U.N. Human Rights Council, it began a covert campaign to claim a seat on the Commission on the Status of Women, which is “dedicated exclusively to gender equality and advancement of women,” according to its website.

Buried 2,000 words deep in a U.N. press release distributed Wednesday on the filling of “vacancies in subsidiary bodies,” was the stark announcement: Iran, along with representatives from 10 other nations, was “elected by acclamation,” meaning that no open vote was requested or required by any member states — including the United States.

The U.S. currently holds one of the 45 seats on the body, though the position is set to expire in 2012.

Our emperor believes that people should have a point when they’ve “made enough money”. Yup, that’s what he said. His implication is that he is the one to tell when you’ve “made enough money”.

Via News Alert and Breitbart TV, consider this Share the Wealth 2010. Barack Obama went off the TelePrompter in his speech to a Quincy, Illinois audience about Wall Street reform. After saying that Democrats don’t begrudge success that’s “fairly earned,” Obama then ad-libs — and reveals more about himself than he probably wanted:

We’re not, we’re not trying to push financial reform because we begrudge success that’s fairly earned. I mean, I do think at a certain point you’ve made enough money. But, you know, part of the American way is, you know, you can just keep on making it if you’re providing a good product or providing good service. We don’t want people to stop, ah, fulfilling the core responsibilities of the financial system to help grow our economy.

Compare that to his remarks as prepared for delivery:

Now, we’re not doing this to punish these firms or begrudge success that’s fairly earned. We don’t want to stop them from fulfilling their responsibility to help grow our economy.

He should have stuck with the TelePrompter. The President doesn’t get to decide when people have “made enough money.” In fact, as the radio host notes, that’s a statist point of view. Furthermore, the responsibility of an entrepreneur isn’t to “grow our economy,” core or otherwise. It’s to grow his own economy. In a properly regulated capitalist system, the natural tension of self-interests create economic growth through innovation and efficient use of capital and resources.

Put simply, a free people work for themselves, not for the government. Barack Obama seems to have a problem understanding that.

Obama’s egomaniac, emperor want-to-be attitude is never more prevalent than when he is challenged on an issue. You can see the consternation and sometimes, outright anger in his face when this happens. He expects everyone to accept what he says or does, without question, obey him, at the minimum, or worship him, at the extreme.

Is President Obama incapable of dealing with journalists who question his policies? The White House press corps is becoming increasingly agitated with an administration that reacts particularly strongly to criticism, and even skepticism.

The White House has adopted a pugilistic attitude towards the press, lashing out at journalists who criticize the president, shutting others out, and adopting a deferential attitude towards the press corps that has some journalists reminiscing about the openness of — gasp — the George W. Bush presidency.

The Obama administration “came in with every reporter giving them the benefit of the doubt,” one journalist told Politico’s Josh Gersten and Patrick Gavin. “They’ve lost all that goodwill.” It seems that the press corps’s offense is questioning the administration’s positions.

CNBC’s Dennis Kneale weighed in on the channel’s website today, where he called Obama a “bully.” The president “gets pouty whenever anyone dares to disagree with him” Kneale claimed. “He seems to view dissension not as healthy public debate but as a suspicious, pernicious challenge to his omnipotence and popularity.”

That is a problem for journalists, whose success can be measured in part by the degree of skepticism they apply to those in power. Though an effective press is one that is not dissuaded by a hostile administration, comity and transparency often go hand in hand — the lack of the former makes the latter tougher.

To the extent Kneale’s critique is accurate, President Obama looks a whole lot like Candidate Obama. He and his administration do their best to control the message by funneling information to select sources and hammering journalists and media outlets that paint the president or his policies in a less than appealing light.

I write to you as a charter member of the tribe. I’m not only Jewish, I’m religious. I’m married to an Israeli girl (she’ll receive her citizenship next year and she is a proud soon-to-be American). I go to synagogue regularly, keep kosher, keep the Sabbath.

American Jews, I have one request of you: please pull your heads out of your posteriors.

I mean that in all sincerity. Your continued support for Democrats and an administration that is openly anti-Semitic is a disgrace. Your embrace of a party that seeks to hamstring Israel in the name of a wholly fictitious Middle East peace process is contemptible. Your loyalty to a president who consistently sides with Palestinian and Iranian mass murder-supporters is disgusting.

Your backing of a man who has spent his life surrounding himself with the worst anti-Semites America has to offer — Jeremiah Wright, Rashid Khalidi (former Palestinian terrorist spokesman), Louis Farrakhan (“I don’t like the way [Jews] leech on us”), Samantha Power, Robert Malley, to name a few — is nothing short of reprehensible. Rahm Emanuel’s presence in the Obama cabinet doesn’t ameliorate Obama’s anti-Semitism — it just provides it convenient cover. Al Sharpton wrongly called Condoleezza Rice and Colin Powell “house negroes”; Emanuel is a kapo.

Even as you continue to buttress a president who seeks the destruction of your co-religionists, you demonstrate your myopia by rejecting the tea party movement and evangelical Christian Israel-supporters.

The tea party movement is your ally for three important reasons. First, it supports capitalism against the forces of socialism — and capitalism keeps America strong enough to provide Israel with a hand against its evil adversaries. Second, American Jews are, by far, the highest-earning religious group in the United States — the tea party fights for your right to keep your money. Third, the tea party stands against government overreach — and in an era when government overreach promotes anti-religious secularism, Jews must stand with the tea party.

Your rejection of evangelical Christians is even more idiotic. Evangelical Christians are the only major voting bloc preventing President Obama from breaking ties with Israel. When Janet Porter, an evangelical Florida talk show host, heard about Obama’s anti-Israel tyranny, she responded by asking her listeners to buy dozens of yellow roses to send to Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s office as a show of support. The price per dozen: $19.48, in honor of the year of Israel’s founding (1948). Over 14,000 flowers were delivered. Meanwhile, Adm. James Jones, Obama’s national security adviser and the man who brought Jew-hater Zbigniew Brzezinski into Obama’s inner circle, was busy telling anti-Semitic jokes before the Washington Institute for Near East Policy.

“But they want to convert us!” many American Jews shout. Not all Christians do. But for the rest — so what? Would you sacrifice the support of millions of good-hearted Christians because they want to discuss Jesus with you? If your own belief system is so fragile, the weakness is yours, not theirs. While you expend energy whining about Jehovah’s Witnesses who show up at your door with a Bible, Obama supports radical Muslims who would show up at your door with a gun — or, as in the case of Daniel Pearl, a butcher’s knife.

The relationship between Israel and Turkey has been strained at best, but one cannot deny the strategic importance of the military cooperation that exists(ed) between Israel and her Muslim neighbor nation.

On the one hand, the joint military exercise taking place between Turkey and Syria is cause for concern and intelligence officials are monitoring events as the war of words between Israel and her Arab neighbors intensifies, including Turkey, Egypt, Lebanon, Syria and Hizbullah.

Just recently, Syrian leader Bashar al-Assad threatened to catapult Israel back to the ‘stone age’ if compelled to engage in a military conflict with IDF forces. This latest threat joins numerous statements released in recent weeks from Lebanese President Mishael Suleiman, Egyptian Foreign Minister Ahmed Aboul Gheit, and Hizbullah leaders.

For a second time in a number of months, Turkish forces earlier this week have begun joint exercises with Syrian troops, sending a worrisome message to Israel. Turkey has been openly shifting its alliance to radical nations such as Syria and Iran, openly speaking out against Israel in the international political arena, formerly a staunch ally.

On the other hand, tourism to Turkey from Israel has increased against following the sharp drop after Operation Cast Lead, and Turkey continues to receive drone pilotless aircraft manufactured by Israel, while seeking to order other sophisticated weapons from Israel Military Industry. Israel on the other hand has decided to review each order on its own merit, no longer willing to furnish Turkey with everything Ankara wishes to acquire, cautiously aware that the current shift of loyalty may result in Israeli-manufactured military hardware being used against Israel if Arab nations launch a military attack against Israel.

Continuing his threats against Yerushalayim, Assad told Kuwaiti media that if Israel launches an attack against Hizbullah in southern Lebanon, his armed forces will improve a naval blockade against Israel.

Efforts to release messages of calm from Jerusalem have had a limited impact at best as Arab leaders seem determined to escalate the war of words against Israel.

04.28.10

This pretty well sums it up:“Mexico is doing the job Arizona is now doing — a job the U.S. government has failed miserably to do: putting its people first. Here’s the proper rejoinder to all the hysterical demagogues in Mexico (and their sympathizers here on American soil) now calling for boycotts and invoking Jim Crow laws, apartheid and the Holocaust because Arizona has taken its sovereignty into its own hands: Hipócritas [Spanish for ‘hypocrite’ -ed].”

Mexican President Felipe Calderon has accused Arizona of opening the door “to intolerance, hate, discrimination and abuse in law enforcement.” But Arizona has nothing on Mexico when it comes to cracking down on illegal aliens. While open-borders activists decry new enforcement measures signed into law in “Nazi-zona” last week, they remain deaf, dumb or willfully blind to the unapologetically restrictionist policies of our neighbors to the south.

The Arizona law bans sanctuary cities that refuse to enforce immigration laws, stiffens penalties against illegal alien day laborers and their employers, makes it a misdemeanor for immigrants to fail to complete and carry an alien registration document, and allows the police to arrest immigrants unable to show documents proving they are in the U.S. legally. If those rules constitute the racist, fascist, xenophobic, inhumane regime that the National Council of La Raza, Al Sharpton, Catholic bishops and their grievance-mongering followers claim, then what about these regulations and restrictions imposed on foreigners?

— The Mexican government will bar foreigners if they upset “the equilibrium of the national demographics.” How’s that for racial and ethnic profiling?

— If outsiders do not enhance the country’s “economic or national interests” or are “not found to be physically or mentally healthy,” they are not welcome. Neither are those who show “contempt against national sovereignty or security.” They must not be economic burdens on society and must have clean criminal histories. Those seeking to obtain Mexican citizenship must show a birth certificate, provide a bank statement proving economic independence, pass an exam and prove they can provide their own health care.

— Illegal entry into the country is equivalent to a felony punishable by two years’ imprisonment. Document fraud is subject to fine and imprisonment; so is alien marriage fraud. Evading deportation is a serious crime; illegal re-entry after deportation is punishable by ten years’ imprisonment. Foreigners may be kicked out of the country without due process and the endless bites at the litigation apple that illegal aliens are afforded in our country (see, for example, President Obama’s illegal alien aunt — a fugitive from deportation for eight years who is awaiting a second decision on her previously rejected asylum claim).

— Law enforcement officials at all levels — by national mandate — must cooperate to enforce immigration laws, including illegal alien arrests and deportations. The Mexican military is also required to assist in immigration enforcement operations. Native-born Mexicans are empowered to make citizens’ arrests of illegal aliens and turn them in to authorities.

— Ready to show your papers? Mexico’s National Catalog of Foreigners tracks all outside tourists and foreign nationals. A National Population Registry tracks and verifies the identity of every member of the population, who must carry a citizens’ identity card. Visitors who do not possess proper documents and identification are subject to arrest as illegal aliens.

All of these provisions are enshrined in Mexico’s Ley General de Población (General Law of the Population) and were spotlighted in a 2006 research paper published by the Washington, D.C.-based Center for Security Policy. There’s been no public clamor for “comprehensive immigration reform” in Mexico, however, because pro-illegal alien speech by outsiders is prohibited.

The situation in the Middle East is heating up, so I would advise all of us to keep our eye on things from a “prophetic” standpoint.

The news of late has been replete with stories of interest to those of us awaiting the fulfillment of bible prophecy, particularly where end times conflicts scheduled to occur in the Middle East are concerned. Here are a few examples:

* Jordan’s King Abdullah is saying war in the Middle East is possible unless Israel and the Palestinian Authority have entered into “serious” peace negotiations by July. (Source)
* The Prime Minister of Turkey recently branded Israel as the “principal threat to peace” in the Middle East. (Source)
* Turkey’s military has traditionally stood guard over the nation’s secular democracy, but seems to be losing control amid rumors that Turkish Prime Minister Recep Erdogan wants to turn Turkey into an Islamic state. (Source)
* Israel has reportedly delivered a secret warning to Syrian President Bashar Assad that it will respond to missile attacks from Hezbollah, the militant Lebanese-based Islamist group, by launching immediate retaliation against Syria itself. (Source)
* Syria is tightening its military alliance with Turkey, reinforcing a recent threat made to send Israel back to “the Stone Age” if it attacks Hizbullah. Syrian President Bashar Assad recently told a Kuwaiti newspaper Syria has “surprises” in store for Israel. (Source)
* Palestinian leader Mahmoud Abbas has called on President Barack Obama to impose a Middle East peace deal. (Source)

Examining the above through the lens of bible prophecy, it is clear as crystal that God is alive, on His throne and in control where the wicked world we’re living in today is concerned. Just as He said, He has made known to us the end from the beginning (Isaiah 46:10) and the end of man governing the earth? It is scheduled to occur at Armageddon as foretold in Revelation 16:16, the culmination of a series of end times conflicts set to occur in the Middle East, some of which may be within view now as the news stories above highlight.

In Isaiah 17:1, we’re told that the city of Damascus, Syria is going to be “taken away from being a city” and will be left a “ruinous heap”. Recently, there has been a lot of discussion concerning Syria supplying Hezbollah with Scud missiles which, in a worst case scenario for Syria if ever there was one, could be armed with chemical munitions. Already it has been reported, as shown above, that Israel plans to attack Syria directly if those weapons are used against the Jewish nation. Israeli PM Netanyahu has downplayed that possibility of late, saying Israel isn’t planning a move against Damascus, but let’s not kid ourselves. If Hezbollah launches chemical weapons-tipped Scuds at Israel, it won’t take long for the obvious conclusion to be reached, namely that the same nation which provided Hezbollah Scuds from its inventory of weapons likely provided the terrorist faction with chemical weapons from its inventory as well, an arsenal which reportedly consists of Sarin, tabun, mustard gas and, possibly, VX.

Given how high tensions in the Middle East presently are, as highlighted by Jordan’s King Abdullah’s prediction that war could erupt by summer, anything could happen. Sooner or later, as we see in bible prophecy, something horrific is going to happen. Syria, based on all of the above, seems committed to that end along with Iran which we know is going to be involved in the battle of Gog-Magog described in the book of Ezekiel (chapters 38 and 39) at the very least.

And then there is all of the above concerning Turkey, a nation which has been on my radar for a long time. For years I’ve been telling my readers to watch for it to turn from being a pro-Western nation aligned with NATO toward becoming a future member of the Gog-Magog confederacy alongside Iran and Russia. Month by month, year by year we’ve been seeing this dramatic movement taking place before our very eyes, perhaps never as clearly as the following excerpt from an Israel National News article demonstrates:

Turkish military officials said that its soldiers began joint military exercises with Syria on Monday, the second time in a year. The army maneuvers are another sign of closer ties between Damascus and Ankara, which was considered to be a friend of Israel until last year, when it fell in line with most of the Arab world’s anti-Israel campaign.

Lastly, not only do we see the potential of Isaiah 17:1 and Ezekiel 38-39 being fulfilled in the not-too-distant future, mankind is being pointed down the precise pathway to Armageddon itself by Palestinian leader Mahmoud Abbas. Abbas asking President Obama to impose a Middle East peace agreement is the equivalent of asking for the advent of the Antichrist to occur.

Before I get into the meat of Mahmoud Abbas’ request and how it applies directly to the end times scenario, no, I am not suggesting President Obama is the prophesied Antichrist. I can not state emphatically enough that I don’t know the identity of the prophesied Antichrist to come nor do I care to know as I’m a firm believer in a pre-trib rapture of the Church. The only interest I have in discussing events I believe are leading us toward the advent of the Antichrist is to draw attention to the fact our world is teetering closer and closer to outright asking for him to appear, albeit unknowingly, and how close that may be telling us we are to the Tribulation Period to come which will be preceded by the Rapture of the Church, the blessed hope of every believer in Christ.

Having completed my Antichrist speculation disclaimer, let’s return to the issue of Mahmoud Abbas’ request for President Obama to impose a Middle East peace covenant and why it is significant to end times bible prophecy and Middle East conflict. Let’s look at how the prophet Daniel describes the advent of the Antichrist.

Daniel 9:26-27:

And after threescore and two weeks shall Messiah be cut off, but not for himself: and the people of the prince that shall come shall destroy the city and the sanctuary; and the end thereof shall be with a flood, and unto the end of the war desolations are determined. And he shall confirm the covenant with many for one week: and in the midst of the week he shall cause the sacrifice and the oblation to cease, and for the overspreading of abominations he shall make it desolate, even until the consummation, and that determined shall be poured upon the desolate.

The people who destroyed the city of Jerusalem and the sanctuary in AD 70, in fulfillment of Daniel 9:26, was the Romans. The prince (or leader) that shall come, the Antichrist, will, therefore, be of Roman descent. He will confirm (or make strong) a covenant of peace in the Middle East between Israel and her enemies seven precise years in length. He will do so “with many” in support of him.

When we couple Mahmoud Abbas’ request of President Obama with Daniel’s prophecy, it is compelling evidence that the mindset which will lead to the advent of the Antichrist already exists in the Middle East and, in case you’ve missed it, this isn’t the first time I’ve documented a desire being expressed, both from sources inside and outside the Middle East, for someone to somehow intervene in the ongoing conflict between Israel and its enemies in the Middle East. With the naive idea floating around in diplomatic circles that Israel and the Palestinians being at peace with one another could be beneficial to the West’s efforts to deter Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon, it is likely, particularly if we see warfare of any significant magnitude break out in the Middle East, discussion of someone other than an Israeli or Palestinian sorting their conflict out and bringing it to an end is likely to increase exponentially.

Keep looking up

Everything where the troubled Middle East is concerned is proceeding according to God’s prophetic plan. Could it be more obvious than it presently is? I’m always tempted to say no, but I dare not. A few years ago if someone had told me I’d today be seeing Turkey and Syria partnering up for military drills and Turkey literally “in line with most of the Arab world’s anti-Israel campaign” I probably would’ve struggled to imagine how things could’ve changed so drastically so fast.

If the Lord delays His coming, we can thoroughly expect to see bible prophecy coming alive like never before in the news headlines of our world and increasingly so as time moves forward. While seeing what we assuredly will may be disturbing at times because we know what lies ahead for unrepentant mankind is going to be far worse, may we also be comforted by what we see, bearing in mind that these things coming to pass are not occurring outside of God’s knowledge but completely within His plan, the end result of which is going to be nothing short of glorious for those of us who love the Lord.

US defense secretary Robert Gates said Tuesday night, April 27: “Hizballah has far more rockets and missile than most governments in the world.” He and Israeli defense minister Ehud Barak were talking to reporters after their talks in the Pentagon. Military sources did not see his as high commendation for Barak’s achievements as defense minister. All he had to contribute on this occasion was: “We do not intend to provoke any kind of major collision in Lebanon or with Syria, but are watching closely these developments.”
Gates went on to accuse Syria and Iran of “providing Hizballah with rockets of ever-increasing capability,” adding, “This is obviously destabilizing for the whole region and we’re watching it very carefully.

Both defense chiefs seemed to think that careful watching would somehow erase the hostile buildup of deadly hardware. In fact, Barak’s comment told Iran, Syria and Hizballah they had nothing to fear from continuing their “carefully watched” buildup, even though Syria took it a step forward this month. As debkafile’s military sources reported last week, Syrian instructors have trained two Hizballah brigades in the use of mobile Scud missiles which carry one-ton warheads. It does not matter if those missiles are moved physically across the border to Lebanon, because those brigades can operate them against Israel at short notice from either side of the border.

Our Washington sources report that Syrian president Bashar Assad, under heavy pressure from Washington to keep the Scuds out of Hizballah’s hands, explained to the Obama administration through diplomatic channels that as long as they were kept inside Syria, the Scuds must be seen as a defensive and deterrent weapon against a possible Israeli attack on Lebanon and Syria. He thus placed on Israel the onus for any future outbreak of hostilities.

Gates’ accusation of Iran and Syria Tuesday was the administration’s way of telling Damascus that it does not buy that message.
Unlike the United States, Israel has a ringside seat for watching the rockets and missiles pile up just across its 70-kilometer long border with Lebanon. Gates’ comment – and even more Barak’s assurance – gave Syria and the Hizballah space to carry on building a mighty arsenal, which is aimed at only one country, Israel.

Scientists examining the Shroud of Turin since the restoration that began in 2000 have found a “second face” on its reverse “hidden side,” a discovery they believe adds evidence to the argument it is not a medieval painting or photographic rendering.

As part of the restoration undertaken in the summer of 2002, the Holland cloth – the backing cloth placed on the shroud by the Poor Clare Nuns to preserve it after the 1532 fire – was removed, permitting for the first time in centuries an examination of the back side.

In 2004, Professors Giulio Fanti and Roberto Maggiolo of the Department of Mechanical Engineering at the University of Padua in Italy published in the peer-reviewed Journal of Optics their study, “The Double Superficiality of the Frontal Image of the Turin Shroud.” They concluded there exists a second, even fainter face image on the backside of the Shroud of Turin, corresponding but not identical to the face image of the crucified man seen in head-to-head dorsal and ventral views on the front side.

The second face image on the back of the shroud was hidden for centuries, until the 2002 restoration when the Holland cloth was removed.

Fanti and Maggiolo used image-processing techniques, including Gaussian filters and Fourier transformations to highlight the extremely faint second face on the backside of the shroud, including details of a nose, eyes, hair, beard and mustache.

To the naked eye, the backside of the shroud appears to show no image whatsoever.

Like the face image on the front side of the shroud, the previously hidden image on the backside is a superficial image that exists only on the topmost linen fibers, created by the same dehydration process characteristic of the face and body image on the front.

The backside of the shroud contains only a limited ventral image of the crucified man in which a stain appears to correspond to the crossed hands seen on the front.

Fanti and Maggiolo found no dorsal image of the crucified man on the shroud’s back side.

The researchers concluded the image of the face on the backside of the shroud was not created by a process of painting in which the facial image on the front “bled through” to create an image on the reverse side.

Similarly, if a photographic process created the image of the face, the photographic emulsion on the shroud must have been applied separately on the front and reverse surfaces, without any photographic emulsion soaking through the linen fibers at the center.

The two scientists demonstrated this by noting the image of the face impressed on the backside has “some slight differences” from the front image.

For instance, the nose on the back presents “the same extension of both nostrils, unlike the front side, in which the right nostril is less evident.”

Moreover, Fanti and Maggiolo concluded “the central part of the fabric was clearly not involved in the creation of the image [on the backside] – i.e., the internal part of the linen fabric does not have an image.”

The researchers, other words, found a “doubly superficial” face image on both the front and back sides such that “if a cross-section of the fabric is made, one extremely superficial image appears above and one below, but there is nothing in the middle.”

The shroud, therefore, they concluded, was not created by paint soaking through the linen or by a photographic image printing through to the reverse side, because the front and back facial images are not identical and the center fibers show no image creation whatsoever.

Fanti and Maggiolo concluded the shroud image was created by a “corona discharge,” understood as a radiant burst of light and energy that scorched the body image of the crucified man on the topmost fibers of the shroud’s front and back sides, without producing any image on the centermost of its linen fibers.

“Imagine slicing a human hair lengthwise, from end to end, into 100 long thin slices; each slice one-tenth the width of a single red blood cell,” writes Daniel Porter, editor of ShroudStory.com. “The images on the Shroud of Turin, at their thickest, are this thin.”

Fanti and Maggiolo found the faint image of the face on the reverse side of the shroud contained the same 3D information contained in the face and body image of the crucified man seen on the shroud’s front side.

The current Exposition of the Shroud in Turin, underway until May 23, is the first time the Shroud of Turin has been displayed since the 2002 restoration.

The back side of the shroud is not being shown for public observation; a new backing cloth has been sewn on to replace the Holland cloth, hiding the reverse side once again.

Just two words: lan astaslem, Arabic for “I will not submit” or “I will not surrender.” No Sharia law. If it comes, I will resist it.

The Institute on Religion & Democracy is concerned that Christian groups are not fully realizing the threat posed by an expansion of sharia (Islamic law) in the West, and so it is calling upon churches to stand against global attempts to enshrine it.

“Islam’s goal is to Islamize the entire country — to take the territory and to claim it for Islam,” [Faith McDonnell, director of the religious liberty program at the IRD] explains. “So any of these things that we see happening where Islamists are complaining about offense, like with Franklin Graham coming to the Day of Prayer — it’s just a little bit more territory that they’re taking.”

McDonnell says Christians must speak out for those whose rights could be jeopardized by the imposition of Islamic law. “Living in tolerance of other faith groups does not require Christians to give in to every demand for the sake of political correctness,” she says in a press release.

My awesome wife, Missi, told me about this Rascal Flatts video and I really liked it. We decided to post a link to the song.

“Do you really know what is going on with your friends, family and the people around you? Keep your eyes and ears open and know that even though you are one, you may be the one who can make a difference.”
-Missi

04.27.10

The ink hadn’t even dried from Arizona Gov. Jan Brewer’s signature on the anti-illegal immigration law written by the state legislature before the shrieks and howls and wailing and gnashing of teeth began in earnest in the media.

“This is racial profiling!” they screamed. “What about civil liberties?” “All this does is discriminate against Hispanics!” they moaned.

Wow, what a fuss. Fury erupted because Arizona lawmakers had had enough and decided to become the first state to have the guts to give police the authority to do the unthinkable: enforce the law.

Some concept, huh? Actually letting cops do their jobs. So when an Arizona police officer pulls someone over for speeding or weaving through traffic and they discover that the driver has absolutely no identification on them and is barely capable of speaking English, that officer might conclude that the driver is in Arizona illegally. Ask any cop and they’ll assure you that it doesn’t exactly take a forensics team from NCIS to figure out that someone is an illegal.

Karl Rove book FREE

But ACLU-loving, America-hating bunch that seems to think illegal immigrants deserve weekly ticker-tape parades down Main Street is mortified at Arizona’s chutzpah. They’re upset that at least in ONE state, the jig is finally up.

For too long now, the apologists for illegal immigrants have played a little game. They pretend to understand that the act of sneaking across the border and taking up residence in America is against the law. They even profess discomfort at illegals getting free health care, taking jobs that could belong to American citizens, and occupying seats in our country’s already overcrowded classrooms.

But they expect everyone to ignore the problem. They insist that illegal immigration is a federal concern and therefore oppose any effort for local law enforcement — the real soldiers in the trenches — to be able to do anything about it. It’s as if they believe there’s a magical, mythical federal army of illegal immigration watchdogs that just hasn’t quite yet gotten around to arresting illegals.

But it’s just a game to these folks. They resist enforcement of our illegal immigration laws and pretend to pawn the problem off on the feds so that the problem will never get solved.

Well, Arizona just took a giant step towards rectifying the situation. Polls show over 70% of state residents support the Senate bill that Gov. Brewer signed into law. I’ll bet the national percentage is even higher.

We are, after all, a nation of laws. And we live in a culture where carrying a form of identification is as normal as keeping your car keys in your pocket. When any of us walk into a grocery store and cashes a check, no one skips a beat when asked to present our driver’s license. If a police officer is looking for a criminal, he or she might stop a number of people in that particular area and ask to see their driver’s license. No one bellyaches about civil rights or privacy issues. We’re just happy the cops are trying to find the bad guy.

Arizona has decided that if the federal government will not live up to its responsibility to control the border, it will. Governor Jan Brewer, a Republican, signed a bill that allows police officers to inquire about a person’s immigration status if there is reason to suspect that individual might be an illegal immigrant. The governor correctly noted that the new law “represents another tool for our state to use as we work to solve a crisis we did not create and the federal government has refused to fix.”

The latest example of that failure is the Obama administration’s refusal to finish the border fence begun with some reluctance by the Bush administration.

Critics of the new law, who plan a court challenge, ask how police officers will “know” by observation whether someone might be in the country illegally. Police officers regularly make judgment calls about suspicious behavior, whether it involves erratic driving, passing small packets on the street in drug-infested neighborhoods, or searching cars for drugs and alcohol. “Immigrant groups” are upset that in Arizona people might actually be forced to comply with the law or face deportation.

Let’s get something straight. The failure to protect America’s southern border has been a bipartisan effort. Democrats want more illegal immigrants in the country because they are a potential source of votes they hope will contribute to a permanent Democratic majority. Republicans and their donors want more illegal immigrants in America because they are a source of cheap labor. Once you understand this, you can ignore much of the talk about “human rights.”

If a state, or nation, has laws it will not enforce for political reasons, it mocks both the law and politics, to say nothing of the cultural order. If the language of laws has no meaning other than what lawmakers assign to them after a law is enacted, it is proof that we have arrived in a kind of legal “Wonderland” in which Alice is told by Humpty Dumpty, “When I use a word … it means just what I choose it to mean — neither more nor less.” To which Alice responds, “The question is … whether you can make words mean so many different things.” Politicians constantly try.

So what does the “illegal” in illegal immigration mean? For that matter, what does the less judgmental and legally vacuous “undocumented alien” mean? If something is illegal, according to dictionary.com, it is “forbidden by law or statute.” If one is “undocumented” that person lacks “the needed documents, as for permission to live or work in a foreign country.” Sociological and political considerations notwithstanding, the law should be the law and its requirements ought to be universally adhered to, or punishment imposed for their violation.

According to the Federation for American Immigration Reform, as of 2007, there are about 475,000 illegal immigrants in Arizona straining an already overburdened economy. Taxpaying citizens must underwrite the cost of schooling for their children, as well as visits to emergency rooms. In California, several hospitals have had to close because they could no longer afford to give free care to noncitizens. Gangs in Arizona operate under the command of drug lords in Mexico. This and other criminal activity threaten the peace and security of Arizonans and potentially all American citizens. Is this something that must be endured for the sake of “human rights groups” and “immigration rights groups,” or is it long past time to slow the flow?

The Arizona legislature and Governor Brewer have correctly chosen to slow the flow. They realize a state and a nation unwilling to protect their borders cannot hope to preserve qualities that have made this country what it is but won’t be for much longer if we permit this illegal invasion to continue.

If you can’t attend the event, set your alarm clock and pray for our nation at 6:10 AM on Saturday, May 1, 2010.

A meeting has been set May 1 in Washington for those who have concerns about the status – and direction – of the United States to submit their pleas to someone more powerful than Washington, all of Washington.

The event will happen from sunrise to 2 p.m. at the Lincoln Memorial in Washington, D.C.

“Our economy is strong. Our borders are secure. Jobs are plentiful. Health-care will not be rationed. That executive order will keep us from funding abortion. Global warming is real but cap and trade will fix it. We made the right choices last November. Selecting our president based on race and popularity was a good idea. We don’t need God, we’re doing just fine on our own,” she writes in a commentary column.

“If this is what you believe, this article is not for you. Go back to watching MSNBC and filing your White House reports on all that ‘fishy speech’ you’ve been hearing,” she suggests.

“Furthermore, if you don’t grasp where we are as a nation and how we got here, you’re not invited to May Day. That’s right, stay home this Saturday because this event is not for you. I’m not kidding. I don’t want you there even if it will ‘boost our numbers,’ or bring the media to cover it. You see, this event isn’t for media attention. I’ve said it all along, our goal isn’t to impress any of the power brokers in Washington. We’re having a meeting with someone more powerful than all of them combined.”

The “May Day” event is, in fact, a “mayday” call of distress for the soul of the nation, she said.

According to a schedule released by Liberty Counsel, the subjects addressed will include family, church, education, entertainment, business, government and media.

“The American Revolution was preceded by the Great Awakening. When the Constitutional Convention was about to disintegrate, the founders convened a prayer meeting, and a few weeks later the Constitution was born,” said Mathew Staver, chief of Liberty Counsel and head of the Liberty University school of law.

“Throughout our history, beginning with George Washington, our presidents have called upon America to pray. America is a great nation because it has honored God. Today, we are calling upon all Americans to pray for our country in these uncertain times.”

Porter said people need to be in prayer even before the event.

“Get right before God. Turn off your television, shut off your computer and open His word and spend time with God like you never have before,” she wrote. “Because that’s the only way God will come and meet with us on Saturday.”

Sunrise – 6:10 a.m. – isn’t really that big a deal.

“Churches in Alaska are opening their doors at 2:10 a.m. to join us,” she said, citing broadcasts on God TV and streamed through American Family Association.

“Get your plane ticket, hop on a bus, rent a van right now and head to the Lincoln Memorial. Too much to ask? George Schalasky is WALKING 720 miles from Illinois…” she said.

“Our economy is not strong. Our borders are far from secure. Jobs are anything but plentiful. Unless we can reverse government health care, it will be rationed. That executive order does nothing to stop us from being forced to fund abortions. Global warming is false and cap and trade is about more government control and less freedom. Last November, we chose death and we experiencing the consequences of our actions. We are in peril and it is our own fault. We have never needed God more,” Porter wrote.

“We need to let God know we’re serious about turning back to Him and fasting from something – whether it’s television, dessert or food – will provide the breakthrough we desperately need as a nation,” Scarborough said.

Sonicflood, a Christian group that sings hits such as “Open the Eyes of my Heart” and “I Want to Know You,” has written a May Day song for the event.

In an open invitation to America to attend May Day, Focus on the Family founder James Dobson proclaimed, “Our nation faces what is perhaps the most serious moral crisis since the civil war as we’ve turned our backs on God and have clearly displeased him. May Day 2010 is a time to come together and proclaim what God has done in the past, to pray for forgiveness and to plead for God’s mercy on all of us.”

There may actually be some common sense emanating from the Supreme Court.

The high court last week heard arguments from the University of California’s Hastings College of the Law and a campus chapter of the Christian Legal Society. CLS claims Hastings’ policy forces them to accept as voting members and potential leaders, classmates who do not share their core religious beliefs.

Hastings says official campus groups may not exclude people due to religious beliefs or sexual orientation. But during arguments, Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia was reported as saying: “To require the Christian Society to allow atheists not just to join, but to conduct Bible classes — that’s crazy.”

[Casey Mattox, an attorney with the Alliance Defense Fund], tells OneNewsNow that the policy contradicts everything the school is supposed to stand for. “When you start saying that student groups can’t organize around beliefs, and instead they have to allow people who reject the beliefs of the organization in order to lead them — whether they’re student Christian groups or otherwise — it doesn’t make any sense at all,” he opines.